Skip to main content
Log in

Footprint Evaluation for Flux and Concentration Measurements for an Urban-Like Canopy with Coupled Lagrangian Stochastic and Large-Eddy Simulation Models

Boundary-Layer Meteorology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

A footprint algorithm, based on a Lagrangian stochastic (LS) model embedded into a parallelized large-eddy simulation (LES) model, is used for the evaluation of flux and concentration footprints of passive scalars in flow in and above an urban-like canopy layer of a neutrally stratified \(440 \hbox { m}\) deep boundary layer. The urban-like canopy layer is realized by an aligned array of cuboids whose height H is \(40\hbox { m}\). The canopy flow involves strong small-scale inhomogeneities although it is homogeneous at the large scale. The source height is \(1\hbox { m}\) (0.025H) above the ground in the street canyons, roughly mimicking traffic emissions. Footprints are evaluated for four heights from 0.25H to 2.5H, and for up to eight different horizontal sensor positions per measurement height, comprising sensor positions inside as well as outside of the street canyon that extend perpendicular to the mean wind direction. The LES-LS footprints are compared with footprints estimated by a conventional model (Kormann and Meixner, in Boundary-Layer Meteorol 99:207–224, 2001). It becomes evident that the local heterogeneity of the flow has a considerable impact on flux and concentration footprints. As expected, footprints for measurements within and right above the canopy layer show complex and completely different footprint shapes compared to the ellipsoidal shape obtained from conventional footprint models that assume horizontal homogeneity of the turbulent flow as well as the sources of passive scalars. Our results show the importance of street-canyon flow and turbulence for the vertical mixing of scalar concentration.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. The code can be accessed under http://palm.muk.uni-hannover.de/browser.

References

  • Andren A, Brown A, Graf J, Mason P, Moeng C, Nieuwstadt F, Schumann U (1994) Large-eddy simulation of a neutrally stratified boundary layer: a comparison of four computer codes. Q J R Meteorol Soc 120:1457–1484

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aubinet M, Vesala T, Papale D (eds) (2012) Eddy covariance. A practical guide to measurement and data analysis. Springer, Dordrecht, 438 pp

  • Avissar R, Schmidt T (1998) An evaluation of the scale at which ground-surface heat flux patchiness affects the convective boundary layer using large-eddy simulations. J Atmos Sci 55:2666–2689

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baldocchi D, Falge E, Gu L, Olson R, Hollinger D, Running S, Anthoni P, Bernhofer C, Davis K, Fuentes J, Goldstein A, Katul G, Law B, Lee X, Malhi Y, Meyers T, Munger J, Oechel W, Pilegaard K, Schmid H, Valentini R, Verma S, Vesala T, Wilson K, Wofsy S (2001) FLUXNET: a new tool to study the temporal and spatial variability of ecosystem-scale carbon dioxide, water vapour and energy flux densities. Bull Am Meteorol Soc 82:2415–2435

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beare R, Cortes M, Cuxart J, Esau I, Golaz C, Holtslag A, Khairoutdinov M, Kosovic B, Lewellen D, Lund T, Lundquist J, McCabe A, Macvean M, Moene A, Noh Y, Poulos G, Raasch S, Sullivan P (2006) An intercomparison of large-eddy simulations of the stable boundary layer. Boundary-Layer Meteorol 118:247–272

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cai X, Leclerc M (2007) Forward-in-time and backward-in-time dispersion in the convective boundary layer: the concentration footprint. Boundary-Layer Meteorol 123:201–218

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cai X, Chen J, Desjardins R (2010) Flux footprints in the convective boundary layer: large-eddy simulation and Lagrangian stochastic modelling. Boundary-Layer Meteorol 137:31–47

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Castillo M, Inagaki A, Kanda M (2011) The effects of inner- and outer-layer turbulence in a convective boundary layer on the near-neutral inertial sublayer over an urban like surface. Boundary-Layer Meteorol 140:453–469

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Christen A, Coops N, Crawford BRK, Liss K, Olchovski I, Tooke TR, van der Laan M, Voogt JA (2011) Validation of modeled carbon-dioxide emissions from an urban neighborhood with direct eddy-covariance measurements. Atmos Environ 45:6057–6069

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coceal O, Thomas T, Castro I, Belcher S (2006) Mean flow and turbulence statistics over groups of urban-like cubical obstacles. Boundary-Layer Meteorol 121:491–519

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deardorff J (1970) Convective velocity and temperature scales for the unstable planetary boundary layer and for Rayleigh convection. J Atmos Sci 27:1211–1213

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deardorff J (1980) Stratoculumus-capped mixed layers derived from a three-dimensional model. Boundary-Layer Meteorol 18:495–527

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Finnigan J (2000) Turbulence in plant canopies. Annu Rev Fluid Mech 32:519–571

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flesch T (1996) The footprint for flux measurements, from backward Lagrangian stochastic models. Boundary-Layer Meteorol 78:399–404

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flesch T, Wilson J, Yee E (1995) Backward-time Lagrangian stochastic dispersion models, and their application to estimate gaseous emissions. J Appl Meteorol 34:1320–1332

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foken T, Leclerc M (2004) Methods and limitations in validation of footprint models. Agric For Meteorol 127:223–234

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hanna S, Tehranian S, Carissimo B, MacDonald R, Lohner R (2002) Comparisons of model simulations with observations of mean flow and turbulence within simple obstacle arrays. Atmos Environ 36:5067–5079

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hellsten A, Zilitinkevich S (2013) Role of convective structures and background turbulence in the dry convective boundary layer. Boundary-Layer Meteorol 149:323–353

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Horst T, Weil J (1992) Footprint estimation for scalar flux measurements in the atmospheric surface layer. Boundary-Layer Meteorol 59:279–296

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Inagaki A, Kanda M (2008) Turbulent flow similarity over an array of cubes in near-neutrally stratified atmospheric flow. J Fluid Mech 615:101–120

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Inagaki A, Letzel M, Raasch S, Kanda M (2006) Impact of surface heterogeneity on energy imbalance: a study using LES. J Meterol Soc Jpn 84:187–198

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kanda M, Inagaki A, Letzel M, Raasch S (2004) LES study of the energy imbalance problem with eddy covariance fluxes. Boundary-Layer Meteorol 110:381–404

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Korman R, Meixner F (2001) An analytical footprint model for non-neutral stratification. Boundary-Layer Meteorol 99:207–224

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kotthaus S, Grimmond C (2012) Identification of micro-scale anthropogenic \({\rm CO}_{2}\), heat and moisture sources—processing eddy covariance fluxes for a dense urban environment. Atmos Environ 57:301–316

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kurbanmuradov O, Rannik Ü, Sabelfeld K, Vesala T (2001) Evaluation of mean concentration and fluxes in turbulent flows by Lagrangian stochastic models. Math Comput Simul 54:459–476

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Letzel M, Raasch S (2003) Large-eddy simulation of thermally induced oscillations in the convective boundary layer. J Atmos Sci 60:2328–2341

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Letzel M, Krane M, Raasch S (2008) High resolution urban large-eddy simulation studies from street canyon to neighbourhood scale. Atmos Environ 42:8770–8784

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Markkanen T, Steinfeld G, Kljun N, Raasch S, Foken T (2009) Comparison of conventional Lagrangian stochastic footprint models against LES driven footprint estimates. Atmos Chem Phys 9:5575–5586

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Markkanen T, Steinfeld G, Kljun N, Raasch S, Foken T (2010) A numerical case study on footprint model performance under inhomogeneous flow conditions. Meteorol Z 19:539–547

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McDonald R, Griffiths R, Hall D (1998) An improved method for the estimation of surface roughness of obstacle arrays. Atmos Environ 32:1857–1864

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nordbo A, Järvi L, Haapanala S, Moilanen J, Vesala T (2013) Intra-city variation in urban morphology and turbulence structure in Helsinki, Finland. Boundary-Layer Meteorol 146:469–496

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pascheke F, Barlow J, Robins A (2008) Wind-tunnel modelling of dispersion from a scalar area source in urban-like roughness. Boundary-Layer Meteorol 126:103–124

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Piacsek S, Williams G (1970) Conservation properties of convection difference schemes. J Comput Phys 6:392–405

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pope S (2008) Turbulent flows. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 771 pp

    Google Scholar 

  • Raasch S, Schröter M (2001) PALM—a large-eddy simulation model performing on massively parallel computers. Meteorol Z 10:363–372

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rannik Ü, Markkanen T, Raittila J, Hari P, Vesala T (2003) Turbulence statistics inside and over forest: influence on footprint prediction. Boundary-Layer Meteorol 109:163–189

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmid H (2002) Footprint modelling for vegetation atmosphere exchange studies: a review and perspective. Agric For Meteorol 113:159–183

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schröter M, Bange J, Raasch S (2000) Simulated airborne flux measurements in a LES generated convective boundary layer. Boundary-Layer Meteorol 95:437–456

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schumann U, Sweet R (1988) Fast-fourier-transforms for direct solution of Poisson equation with staggered boundary-conditions. J Comput Phys 75:123–137

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steinfeld G, Raasch S, Markkanen T (2008) Footprints in homogeneously and heterogeneously driven boundary layers derived from a Lagrangian stochastic particle model embedded into large-eddy simulation. Boundary-Layer Meteorol 129:225–248

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thomson D (1987) Criteria for the selection of stochastic models of particle trajectories in turbulent flows. J Fluid Mech 180:529–556

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vesala T, Kljun N, Rannik Ü, Rinne J, Sogachev A, Markkanen T, Sabelfeld K, Foken T, Leclerc M (2008) Flux and concentration footprint modelling: state of the art. Environ Pollut 152:653–666

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weil J, Horst T (1992) Footprint estimates for atmospheric flux measurements in the convective boundary layer. In: Schwartz S, Slinn W (eds) Precipitation scavenging and atmosphere–surface exchange. Hemisphere Publishing, Washington, D.C., pp 717–728

    Google Scholar 

  • Weil J, Sullivan P, Moeng C (2004) The use of large-eddy simulations in Lagrangian particle dispersion models. J Atmos Sci 61:2877–2887

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xie Z, Castro I (2006) LES and RANS for turbulent flows over arrays of wall-mounted obstacles. Flow Turbul Combust 76:291–312

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This study was supported by the German Science Foundation (DFG) under grants RA 617/13-1, RA 617/23-1, and by the German Academic Exchange Service (DAAD), by the Finnish Centre of Excellence in Atmospheric Science – From Molecular and Biological Processes to the Global Climate (project 272041), EU project InGOS Integrated non-CO2 greenhouse gas observation system and ICOS 271878, ICOS-Finland 281255 and ICOS-ERIC 281250 and grant number 138328 funded by the Academy of Finland, and by the European Research Council funded project “Atmospheric planetary boundary layers: Physics, modelling and role in the earth system” (PBL-PMES) (Grant agreement number 227915) and by the CityClim project funded by the Academy of Finland (Grant number 277664). The final computations have been performed on the Cray XC-40 supercomputer of the Center of Scientific Computing (CSC Oy) in Espoo, Finland. CSC is warmly acknowledged for providing us the necessary parallel computing capacity. Preparatory simulations were partly carried out on the IBM Regatta P690 series of the Norddeutscher Verbund für Hoch- und Hochstleistungsrechnen (HLRN) in Hannover/Berlin, Germany and partly on Sun Fire x4600 Cluster Tsubame at the Global Scientific Information and Computing Center of the Tokyo Institute of Technology. Mr. Jin Zhang is acknowledged for modifying the particle boundary condition algorithm of the PALM model for non-flat topographies. Three anonymous reviewers helped improve the manuscript and provided different viewpoints to the problem.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Antti Hellsten.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hellsten, A., Luukkonen, SM., Steinfeld, G. et al. Footprint Evaluation for Flux and Concentration Measurements for an Urban-Like Canopy with Coupled Lagrangian Stochastic and Large-Eddy Simulation Models. Boundary-Layer Meteorol 157, 191–217 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10546-015-0062-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10546-015-0062-4

Keywords

Navigation